DETAILED CAR COMPARISON

2000 Citroen XM vs 2000 Mitsubishi Challenger Comparison

Compare technical specifications, scores and everyday-use differences side by side.

VS
WINNER

Mitsubishi Challenger

Leads the overall E-Kıyasla score by 0.75 points.

68.5–69.25
SPECIFICATION GROUPS

Every difference between the two cars

Basic Specifications

CitroenMakeMitsubishi
XMModelChallenger
2000Model year2000
HatchbackBody typeOff-road vehicle
5Seats5
5Doors5

Performance

8,6 s0–100 km/h—
235 km/hTop speed170 km/h
2963 ccEngine displacement2972 cc
200 HPPower185 HP
260 NmTorque265 Nm
6Cylinders6

Fuel & Consumption

PetrolFuel typePetrol
80 ltFuel tank74 lt
—Urban consumption16 lt
—Extra-urban consumption10 lt
11,4 ltAverage consumption—

Transmission & Chassis

Front-wheel driveDrivetrain4x4
5Gears4
205/60 R15Tyre size265/70 R15
YesABSYes

Dimensions

4708 mmLength4530 mm
1794 mmWidth1775 mm
1389 mmHeight1730 mm
1500 KgWeight1830 Kg
2850 mmWheelbase2725 mm

E-Kıyasla Editor’s Note

2000 Citroen XM and 2000 Mitsubishi Challenger approach the same decision from different angles. We compare the exact versions so changes in engine, transmission, dimensions and equipment are not hidden behind the model names.

Overall, Mitsubishi Challenger leads the E-Kıyasla score by 0.75 points. The score provides a consistent summary, while the best choice can still change with priorities such as urban efficiency, luggage space, performance or equipment.

SIMILAR COMPARISONS

Similar comparisons

Explore related comparisons featuring cars from this matchup.

Comments are loading…